' NAZIR AHMAD BHATTI, J.--- Complainant Muhammad Siddique is a resident of Chak No,226/RB and owns a medical store in Chiniot Bazar, Faisalabad. On 15-2-1988, accused Mst. Misbah and Mst.
Bano residents of Kot Hira, Police Station Alipur Chatha, District Gujranwala, who are his relatives, came to his house and on the morning of the next day took his daughter Mst. Sajida Siddique for shopping. When all the three women reached Satiana Road, accused Muhammad Iqbal and Muhammad Azam sons of Muhammad Sadiq residents of Kot Hira and accused Sher son of Khan Muhammad, resident of Pabra, District Sargodha forcibly abducted Mst. Sajida Siddique with the assistance of the other female accused. Muhammad Sharif, Ziaullah and Muhammad Ashraf saw the aforesaid 5 accused forcibly abducting Mst. Sajida Siddique in a car. The complainant first made private efforts to bring back his daughter from the accused but he ultimately recorded F.I.R.
No,121 in Police Station Saddar Faisalabad on 6-3-1988. Accused Muhammad Iqbal was arrested on 30-4-1988 but Mst. Sajida Siddique was not recovered from him. It transpires that Mst. Sajida Siddique escaped from his house on 12-4-1988 and she recorded statement under section 161, Cr.P.C. on 14-4-1988 before P.W.5 Ch. Sher Muhammad Saleem Magistrate 1st Class wherein she charged all the 5 accused for abducting her on 16-2-1988. All the 5 accused were sent up for trial before Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad who charged them under section 11 of the Offence of Zina (Enforcement of Hudood) Ordinance, 1979. Accused Muhammad Iqbal was also charged under section 10(3) of the Hudood Ordinance. All the 5 accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. After the conclusion of the trial accused Muhammad Azam, Sher, Mst. Bano and Mst. Misbah were acquitted while accused Muhammad Iqbal was convicted under sections 11 and 10(2) of the Hudood Ordinance. For the offence under section 11 of the Hudood Ordinance accused Muhammad Iqbal was sentenced to undergo life imprisonment, to suffer 30 stripes and to pay a fine of Rs,10,000 or in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. For the offence under section 10(2) of the Hudood Ordinance, accused Muhammad Iqbal was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years, to suffer 30 stripes and to pay a fine of Rs,10,000 or in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year. The convict has chairenged his conviction and sentence by Cr.A. No,71/L of 1992 (in hand). One Muhammad Ishfaq also filed a Criminal Revision No,29/L of 1992 for enhancement of the sentence of the convict and for awarding compensation to him.
2. The aforesaid Muhammad Ishfaq alleged that Mst. Sajida Siddique daughter of complainant Muhammad Siddique of F.I.R. No,121 was married to him on 20-4-1988 but she developed illicit relations with Muhammad Iqbal and on 15-3-1989 when he came to his house in the evening and found his wife missing, he was informed by certain other persons that his wife Mst. Sajida Siddique had been abducted by Muhammad Iqbal. He made efforts privately for the return of his wife but ultimately he submitted a written complaint to S.P., City Faisalabad on 17-4-1989 whereupon F.I.R.
No,157 was recorded on the same day wherein he charged accused Muhammad Iqbal, his brother Muhammad Azam, his father Muhammad Sadiq and his sister Mst. Safia Bibi for abducting his wife Mst. Sajida Siddique. The latter was also charged for committing Zina with her co-accused Muhammad Iqbal. Accused Muhammad Iqbal and Mst. Sajida Siddique were arrested on 11-1-1990.
After investigation all the 5 accused were Lent up for trial before the Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad who charged them under section 16 of the Hudood Ordinance. The learned Additional Sessions Judge also charged accused Muhammad Iqbal and Mst. Sajida Siddique under section 10(2) of the Hudood Ordinance. All the 5 accused pleaded not guilty and claimed trial. After the conclusion of the trial the learned Additional Sessions Judge acquitted accused Mst. Safia Bibi, Muhammad Azam and Muhammad Sadiq. But accused Muhammad Iqbal was convicted under section 16 of the Hudood Ordinance, while he and Mst. Sajida Siddique were both convicted under section 10(2) of the Hudood Ordinance. For the offence under section 16 of the Hudood Ordinance accused Muhammad Iqbal was sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 5 years, to suffer 30 stripes and to pay a fine of Rs,5,000 or in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for 6 months. For the offence under section 10(2) of the Hudood Ordinance both the accused Muhammad Iqbal and Mst. Sajida Siddique were sentenced to undergo rigorous imprisonment for 10 years, to suffer 30 stripes and to pay a fine of Rs,10,000 or in default to further undergo rigorous imprisonment for one year each. Both the convicts have challenged their conviction and sentence by CrA. No,98/L of 1992. Complainant Muhammad Ishfaq has also filed Criminal Revision Petition No,28/L of 1992 for enhancement of the sentence and for payment of compensation to him.
3. Since appellant Muhammad Iqbal is accused in both the occurrences reported in F.I.R. No,121 and F.I.R. No,157, and although Mst. Sajida Siddique was the alleged abductee in F.I.R. No,121 but she was made accused in F.I.R. No,157, as also both the occurrences are interconnected, hence both the aforesaid criminal appeals and both the criminal revision petitions are being disposed of by one judgment written in CrA. No,71/L of 1992.
4. It was an admitted fact that Muhammad Siddique complainant of F.I.R. No,121 and father of appellant Mst. Sajida Siddique is husband of paternal-aunt of appellant Muhammad Iqbal and appellant Mst. Sajida Siddique is his daughter from his first wife. It was the case, of the complainant Muhammad Siddique that his daughter had been abducted by appellant Muhammad Iqbal but defence version was that the complainant had agreed to marry his daughter to appellant Muhammad Iqbal but he had subsequently refused to do so and Mst. Sajida Siddique had herself contracted a marriage with her co-appellant voluntarily. Although appellant Mst. Sajida Siddique in her statement under section 164, Cr.P.C. recorded on 14-4-1988 in the case of F.I.R. No,121 had charged her co-appellant Muhammad Iqbal for abducting her and subjecting her to Zina-bil-Jabr but during the trial she refused to appear as a prosecution witness because her plea was that she had voluntarily married appellant Muhammad Iqbal on 20-1-1988 in Mandi Bahauddin and she was living with him voluntarily as his wife. She also denied the allegation that she had been abducted by the accused. Mst. Sajida Siddique was aged about 26 years on 20-1-1992 when she appeared as D.W.1 and stated that she had voluntarily married appellant Muhammad Iqbal on 20- 1-1988 with her free consent and that she was not being detained by any person. Appellant Muhammad Iqbal also made the following statement in his deposition under section 342, Cr.P.C.
"Mst. Irshad Bibi, my real Phuphi, is second wife of Muhammad Siddique complainant. In exchange of my Phuphi Mst. Irshad Bibi, Muhammad Siddique committed to marry his daughter Mst. Sajida Siddique with me. After that Muhammad Siddique received Rs,35,000 from me for sending me abroad but he failed to send me abroad. When I demanded back my said money, he refused to pay back the same. Our relations became strained with him and he refused to give hand of his daughter Mst. Sajida Siddique, to me. Thereafter on 20-1-1988, Mst. Sajida Siddique, of her own, came to me at Mandi Bahaudddin and contracted marriage with me. With the connivance of police Muhammad Siddique involved me and my co-accused in this false case."
5. In so far as the occurrence of F.I.R. No,157 is concerned complainant Muhammad Ishfaq had made a written report of the occurrence more than a month thereafter but he produced Nikahnama on 17-5-1989. On the contrary the plea of both the appellants in this case was that they were married to each other voluntarily on 20-1-1988 and appellant Mst. Sajida Siddique had become pregnant during this wedlock. It was also the defence version that after 20-1-1988, when both the appellants were married to each other they had been living together as husband and wife and there was no question of any abduction thereafter of appellant Mst. Sajida Siddique by appellant Muhammad Iqbal.
6. In so far as the case F.I.R. No,157 is concerned, there are certain prominent features which have attracted our attention. The report of the alleged occurrence made by complainant Muhammad Ishfaq gave a bare allegation of abduction whereas Nikahnama of the alleged Nikah of complainant with appellant Mst. Sajida Siddique was produced by him more than a year thereafter. It had also come in evidence that Mst. Sajida Siddique was pregnant and she gave birth to a child in February or March, 1988 but the complainant Muhammad Ishfaq did not disclose the factum of her pregnancy in his report. Had she lived with hint (the complainant) as his wife after 20-4-1988 he would have certainly known about her pregnancy and would have also certainly disclosed it in his report because that would have corroborated his allegation. The absence of this circumstance is the writtten report of the complainant clearly established that the allegation of his marriage with appellant Mst. Sajida Siddique and their living together thereafter was not true. On the contrary the testimony of C.W.1 Khalid Dad Khan Inspector, C.W.2 Haji Ghulam Qasim Inspector/S.H.O., P.W.10 Babar Anwar A.S.I. and P.W.11 Muhammad Rafique Hassan S.P. had proved that appellant Mst. Sajida Siddique had stated before them that she was never married to the complainant but she was legally-weddei wife of co-appellant Muhammad Iqbal and she had never been abducted by the latter and that she had given birth to a child in February, 1988 during the wedlock with her co-appellant Muhammad Iqbal. She also made the following statement in her deposition under section 342, Cr.P.C.
"My father Muhammad Siddique had contracted second marriage with Mst. Irshad Bibi the real Phuphi of Muhammad Iqbal accused and in lieu of that my hand was promised to Muhammad Iqbal. Muhammad Iqbal paid Rs,35,000 and my father had promised to send him abroad. My father failed to fulfil his promise and relations grew strained between my father and Muhammad Iqbal.
When Muhammad Iqbal demanded back that money my father quarrelled with him and broke my engagement with Muhammad Iqbal. He wanted forcibly to marry me with some other person to which I refused. I being major and sui juris entered into Nikah on 20-1-1988, with Muhammad Iqbal.
Subsequently by playing a trick my father forged the Nikah with Ishfaq in April, 1988 and in order to coerce me he got this case falsely lodged against me and the relatives of Iqbal, so that I may accede to his omission and concede to some other person as my husband whom my father liked. I am legally-wedded wife of Iqbal and 1 have acted according to Sharia."
' In the case of F.I.R. No,157 Raja Pervez Maqsood Sajid, appearing as D.W.1, had stated that he was acting as Nikah Registrar of Mandi Bahauddin and on 20-1-1988 he had re jstered the Nikah of Mst.
Sajida Siddique with Muhammad Iqbal and he also produced Exh.DA. attested copy of original Nikahnama, while D.W.2 Shadi Hassan had recited Nikah of both the appellants on 20-1-1988 in Mandi Bahauddin.
7. We have also perused the alleged Nikahnama of the complainant with appellant Mst. Sajida Siddique. Its column about signature of the bride does not clearly show the signature of Mst. Sajida Siddique. On the contrary the Nikahnama of both the appellants clearly discloses her signature.
8. We have very seriously taken into consideration all the aforesaid circumstances of both the cases and we have noted that appellant Mst. Sajida Siddique had voluntarily and by her own consent contracted marriage with her co-appellant Muhammad Iqbal on 20-1-1988, that at that time she was major and more than 20 years of age, that she had never been abducted by her co- appellant Muhammad Iqbal before her marriage with him in January, 1988, that there was no proof of her marriage with Muhammad Ishfaq complainant of F.I.R. No,157 in April, 1988, that the evidence with regard to allegation that the complainant Muhammad Ishfaq and Mst. Sajida Siddique had lived together as husband and wife was neither truthful nor free of doubt and that there was also no evidence of appellant Msi. Sajida Siddique having been abducted by her co-appellant Muhammad Iqbal in April, 1988.
9. For the aforesaid reasons we have arrived at the conclusion that appellant Mst. Sajida Siddique and appellant Muhammad Iqbal were husband and wife after 20-1-1988. Both had married each other voluntarily and freely and that none of the offences disclosed against them in both the F.I.R.
No,121 and F.I.R. No,157 was proved against them. Consequently, we accept both the Appeals Nos.71/L of 1992 and 98/L of 1992. The convictions and sentences of both the appellants, namely, Muhammad Iqbal and Mst. Sajida Siddique recorded on 20-1-1992 by the learned Additional Sessions Judge, Faisalabad are set aside and they are acquitted of the offences for which they were convicted and sentenced. Both the appellants are on bail. Their bail bonds stand discharged.
10. As both the appeals are accepted, the question of payment of compensation to both the complainants does not . arise. Both the Criminal Revision Petitions Nos.28/L of 1992 and 29/L of 1992 are dismissed accordingly.